Subject: [Ipoverib] IETF-55 IPoIB WG meeting minutes

From: Jerry Chu <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 10:47:25 -0800

IP over InfiniBand: 55th IETF Atlanta (11/18/02 - Meeting Minutes by 
Sunay Tripathi)
==================================================================

Agenda

    Charter update
    IPoIB MIBs status
    IPoIB connected mode
    Wrap up

Charter Update - Jerry Chu (Sun Microsystems)

    IPoIB connected mode was added and approved by IESG.

    Care must be taken to avoid interference between reliability
    algoriths at different level.

    See the updated WG web page
    http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ipoib-charter.html

    Drafts under IESG review

        Link and multicast draft
        Encapsulation draft
        DHCP over IB draft
        
        ADs have already commented. Need to address ADs comments.

MIBs Status - Sean Harnedy (InfiniSwitch corporation).

    6 MIBs currently defined in the WG charter

    Sean discussed the current status of each MIB (what was the
    current revision etc).    

    Next steps -
        
        Interest in defining new MIBS?
        Update IDs to new 1.1 IBTA sepc.
        Advance current MIB work.
        Gather any implementation experience.
        Any Interest in a IPoIB Management overview doc?
        Advance certain IPoIB MIB to WG last call.

IPoIB connected mode - Vivek Kashyap (IBM)

    Vivek will mail out the presentation slides to the mailing list.
    The main point in the presentation was you need to know the
    destination GID to initiate connection and possibilities on
    how to resolve the GID.

    Jerry asked if the proposal uses IP address hosted on a UD QP
    to identify its equivalent RC/UC QP, wouldn't it require
    a thousand IB connections when there are a thousand IP
    addresses hosted on the same UD QP interface? Vivek said
    he needs to think about this. Jerry mentioned a similar
    issue with the UD QPN - it takes GID+QPN (UD) to uniquely
    idetifiy an IPoIB link interface. But UD-QPN is not present
    in the proposal when identifying RC/UC QP.

    Some discussions continued on how MTU is determined.
    AD commented that it's probably worth defining a default MTU
    for IPoIB UC/RC to save some trouble. A follow-on comment was
    made on using two separate connections for IPv6 and IPv4
    because the former supports jumbograms (> 64KB).

Wrap up - Jerry Chu

    Now that the IBA 1.1 specs have been released, Jerry asked
    the draft authors to verify the contents of their drafts
    against the 1.1 specs.

    AD (Thomas Narten) asked how much more change is expected
    in the future, e.g. what is the next IBA release (2.0?) and
    when? Will any future change require modifications to the
    IPoIB specs? Jerry believed that is unlikely because IBTA
    must maintain a high degree of compatibility between newer
    specs and the old ones. The 1.1 release mainly addresses the
    management and multicast areas, both are incomplete in the
    1.0 release.

    No more questions were asked so the WG meeting was concluded.

_______________________________________________
IPoverIB mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipoverib